Climbing the Corporate Web
February 1, 2007 |
Sally Helgeson wrote The Female Advantage in the 1990s. This was a classic, paradigm-changing book about how women’s leadership styles and gifts are changing the face of organizations. Her subsequent work, The Web of Inclusion, continued the conversation, exploring how women leaders prefer to work in flattened, inter-woven organizational structures—literally, webs of relationships. And through these webs of connection, women maximize productivity and innovation.
In The Web of Inclusion, Helgeson describes some of the common leadership practices of the successful women she researched:
“The women I studied built profoundly integrated and organic organizations in which the focus was on nurturing good relationships; in which the niceties of hierarchical rank and distinction played little part; and in which lines of communication were multiple, open, and diffuse. I noted that the women tended to put themselves at the center of their organizations rather than at the top, emphasizing both accessibility and equality, and that they labored constantly to include people in their decision-making. This had the effect of undermining the boundaries so characteristic of mainstream organizations, with their strict job descriptions, categorization of people according to rank, and restrictions on the flow of information.”
Helgeson is not the only one who has noticed the tendency of women to work relationally, and to view leadership primarily as influence and empowerment vs. power and authority. Yet, that relational, inclusive model of leadership is certainly not the norm. Leadership books and seminars in business are slowly waking up to fact that the world has gone relational. But many organizations lag behind new theories and training on leadership, and are still functioning with the sole visionary model of the 1980s: the take-charge, no-nonsense CEO who not only sets the course, but micro-manages just how that course is followed. As Margaret Wheatley describes them, these are the “command and control” leaders who solicit little input and, as a result, inspire little passion, and even less real loyalty.
Certainly, there are exceptions. But the top-down, “I-decide-you-follow” approach is still the leadership default in most organizations, especially ministry. Collaborative, relational systems are on the rise, especially in the field of technology, where change happens in nano-seconds, and the ability to adapt, brainstorm, and innovate on a dime are basic survival skills. Google’s organizational style is, as you would guess, web-based. They are fond of saying that they structure the company just enough to get things done, and subtract a little from that.
But isn’t this ironic. The inclusive, networking skills that are at such a premium in companies like Google are D team skills in the old business world. Known there as “soft skills” (i.e., less effective), these organic, relational ways of working are seen as feminine and therefore, weak, indecisive, people-pleasing, time-consuming, and manipulative. Yes, even as mega-companies like eBay (run by a woman), Starbucks, Apple, and Google have redefined “soft” skills as essential.
If you’ve been told you have “soft” skills that you need upgrade to “hard”—maybe a bent toward process, team work, conversation, listening, empowering, empathizing, and networking—you’d better get a second opinion. And if you’ve been told that you can’t be both “soft” and “hard”—
relational and decisive, nurturing and authoritative, collaborative and visionary, take-input and take-charge—take a second look at the leaders you admire most. You’ll find that they are incredibly “take-charge” and authoritative about purpose. They never negotiate identity. In fact, their highest leadership calling is to remind people of who they are, because people and organizations constantly forget. But they are also adamantly organic about strategy. Because they are consistent and clear about purpose, these five-star influencers are able to let go of the reins of control and involve peoples’ passions and gifts in the strategy.
You have essential leadership skills. Do whatever it takes to use them. Even if that means applying at Google.
Posted by Caryn Rivadeneira on February 1, 2007
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/247
Comments
Oddly enough, I was just reading how Google tops the list of 100 Best Places to Work...
And yet as enticing as their Benefits alone are...(Seriously! 11 eateries on one campus and all FREE food! As a mom, I can't imagine the luxury...)
Anyway, I can't help but think that some of the skills of the "hard-soft" leadership styles you described are precisely what is needed for the organism (and organization) that is the church today.
I am a 28 year old woman pushing on the 'ceiling' I have discovered in my church for my personal role in leadership. Thank you for the encouragement to press on and that women as you have described are of value!
Posted by: Kim on February 2, 2007
Kim,
Yes, the Google Church. Hard to imagine. But I do think that we are on the verge of a new era in ministry. Either we honor the relational, dare I say - collaborative - nature of the one we worship (Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier) and use this window of opportunity to release God's work into many hands, OR we fossilize in our command-and-control fixation.
Women such as yourself are leading the way. If they can just get past the road blocks. But hey. Forget that. Better yet, create new roads...
Thanks for responding and for the hard, pioneering work you're doing. May you find at least one "eatery" in your situation where there's something synergistic going on!
Sally Morgenthaler
Posted by: Sally Morgenthaler on February 2, 2007
What an excellent, hope-giving article. I have always believed that the most important thing you can do as a leader or follower is to use your soft skills to help people go home at night feeling like they mattered. If they go home satisfied, they don't yell at their kids or spouse, they wave to the neighbor, they sleep better, they may even find time for God and prayer.
But my experience in corporate america has been to push efficiency and profit over all. The environment doesn't always encourage you to get out your "soft skills" to help someone on the job. So I often feel as though I have to do it covertly - as if my soft skills need to be hidden from view because "soft skills are soft on profit".
Yet, if people feel like they matter and believe they make a difference in the organization, they'll do what needs to be done to make the organization successful because they believe they are the organization and they want to be successful - and if they are successful the profits will follow.
If only it were that simple.
Posted by: Beth on February 3, 2007
Beth,
I love your vision (which I think is accurate) about what affirmation does in peoples' lives. That's a world I'd like to see more of, whether in corporate America or the church. Thanks for painting this picture of what our so-called soft-skills can mean for the people we work with. The phrase you used - that people believe the ARE the organization when we communicate to them that they matter - now that's a take home. Thanks!
Sally
Posted by: Sally Morgenthaler on February 6, 2007
I'm a senior vice president at Prison Fellowship. I'm looking for other women in executive leadership at Christian organizations. I'd like to talk about issues like those in this article. If God has placed us where we are, what is the best we can give--and how do we overcome some of the common obstacles? If you're like me--an female executive in a largely male-led Christian organization, please email me. I'd like to get acquainted!
--Karen Strong
Posted by: Karen Strong on February 7, 2007
I agree with the other commenter. God created us to team up with men and work together. Male dominated types of leadership just don't pull together all that God has for the Church - we must have a mix of nurture, compassion, a listening ear, decisiveness, organization, clarity, passion and authority. If men had all it took to rule the world, then we wouldn't be around, and they'd have had the babies too - all males of course :)
Posted by: Sally on February 8, 2007
Dear Sally:
I just came upon your article while researching a Christian film. How refreshing to read a true description of myself trying to succeed in a hierarchical ranked organization.
I have been in management within the performing and visual arts industry for over 20 years -- an industry of artistry, creativity, community and educational outreach, economic development, and profit making.
Most recently I worked as the Director of a state university's performing arts center. My progressiveness, winning attitude, and accomplishments in programming, community and university realtions, financial success, and ethical and transparent work methods were constantly undermined by a Dean who was my supervisior. Because she was a strict vertical power player, one who practices what I call the "DIM" management style -
domination, intimidation, and manipulation -
and I was what you have described as relational and centered - we did not see eye to eye and eventually I was terminated. As a long awaited answer to prayer, she resigned three weeks after she fired me, but I did not get my job back.
A friend gave me a wonderful book called "A Peacock in the Land of Penquins" which also explains the different leadership styles. It easily describes, with great wit, why successful, creative, educated leaders don't fit into old, tired, traditional organizations -- which is what you have descibed.
Thank you for helping describe the old and new, male and female corporate ways of thinking. My termination has greatly hurt my job search and career for the past three years. Through this experience, I will definitely heed my gut feelings when accepting my next job offer. I will recognize the signs of hierarchical rank and dominating personalities within an organization. I believe in and support authority, but not domination.
Posted by: Elaine on March 3, 2007